Kolkata Court March 1935 Judgments
M.A. Adams and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal466
Costello, J.1. On 25th January 1935, acting under the authority of a warrant signed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police under the Provisions of Section 46, Calcutta Police Act, 1866, Sub-Inspector Syed Hossain of the Detective Department raided certain premises consisting of two rooms situated on the first floor of No. 15, Park Street. These rooms were said to be occupied by a club known as Harlequin Club. In the first room there was a billiard table bench, and some sort of locker or cupboard, and from that room access could be had through a swing door, to the second room which was a card room containing a card table, chairs and a small side board. In the entrance hall, as it has been called, the Police party found seven persons, M.A. Adams, Jan Mohammad, Mr. and Mrs. Ellis, Ben Rose, Ismail Bham, and M. Morris. In the card room there were nine persons, F. Coelho, D. Coelho, T. Blake, H. Sukeas, O.K. Spanos, E. Peters, M. Echlin, L. Green, and Robin Neid. The last named jumped out of ...
Tag this Judgment!Sarojini Roy Vs. Romesh Chandra Biswas and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal536,165Ind.Cas.190
R.C. Mitter, J.1. This appeal is on behalf of the plaintiff in a suit for declaration of her title to seven plots of land, described in the plaint, for confirmation of her possession over an area of 4 keors of land, being the northern portion of plot 1, and for recovery of possession of the remaining lands. All the plots of land constituted a non-transferable occupancy holding held by one Ejaraddin under the plaintiff and her predecessor-in-interest.2. Her suit was decreed by the learned Munsif in its entirety, but on appeal the learned Subordinate Judge has maintained the decree of the learned Munsif in respect of 4 keors of land, being the northern part of plot 1, and has dismissed her claim for khas possession in respect of the remaining lands. It has been found that on 15th Falgoon 1323 Ejaraddin sold all the lands of his holding, save and except the aforesaid 4 keors of land, which was his homestead, to defendants 1 and 2. Thereafter he remained in possession of his homestead whic...
Tag this Judgment!Basanta Kumar Pal Vs. Late Durgadas Akrur Chandra Banik
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-1935
Reported in: 163Ind.Cas.703
ORDERMc Nair, J.1. This Rule was obtained by the defendant in a suit brought in the Court of the Small Cause Court Judge of Comilla to have the judgment and decree of that Court dated September 10, 1934 set aside. The opposite party had sued the petitioner to recover certain sums of money. Various defences were raised but they were not allowed to prevail by the learned Judge who decreed the suit in favour of the opposite party. The learned Advocate for the petitioner has put forward two arguments in support of the Rule. It appears that during the course of the trial the defendant pleaded that payments had been made and obtained an order that the plaintiff should produce certain books. Eventually the Court passed an order that those books must be produced before the plaintiff can proceed further. One of those books was not produced and the defendant contended that the suit should be dismissed as the plaintiff had not complied with the Court's order. The learned Judge refused to accede t...
Tag this Judgment!Ajit Kumar Mitra and ors. Vs. Sreemuty Tarubala Dasi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-1935
Reported in: 162Ind.Cas.965
In F.A. No. 220 of 19301. The plaintiff's husband Charu Chander Mitter and all the defendants in the suit, out of which this appeal has arisen, are lineal descendants of one Guru Charan Mitra. A pedigree setting out their relationship is given in the plaint (paper book page 54). The suit was instituted on March 7, 1928, with regard to certain items of properties specified in three schedules to the plaint, Schedules Ka, Kha and Ga. It was alleged in the plaint that in 1880 the four sons of Guru Charan Mitter, viz., Ishan, Girish, Harish and Mahendra, each of whom had acquired various properties, executed a deed whereby they purported to make certain arrangements for the enjoyment and management of the properties. It was averred that the dispositions of the properties and of their income as provided for in the deed were void and of no effect. It was prayed that the deed be construed and so declared and that the properties in the schedule as also other properties that May be discovered be...
Tag this Judgment!The Secretary of State for India in Council Vs. the Bengal Nagpur Rail ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-1935
Reported in: 164Ind.Cas.264a
M.C. Ghose, J.1. This is a second appeal by the Secretary of State for India in Council in an execution case. The matter arose in this way: one Amulya Dhan Mukherjee a clerk on Rs. 40 per month was discharged from employment by the Bengal Nagpur Railway Company. He thereupon instituted a suit against the Railway for damages, etc, at Rs. 1,900 and odd. The suit was laid in forma pauperis and the court-fee payable thereupon to Government was Rs. 187-8-0. After certain contest; the Railway Company compromised the matter with the plaintiff for Rs. 391-5-0. Upon that sum being paid by the Railway Company to the plaintiff, the parties filed a petition of compromise and the suit was decreed on compromise. The relevant words of the decree are as follows:It is ordered and decreed that the suit be and the same is hereby decreed on compromise for Rs. 391-5-0 only, that the plaintiff do pay Rs. 187-8-0 as value of the court-fee on the plaint due to Government to the Government. The payment of cour...
Tag this Judgment!Kumar Birendra Nath Roy Bahadur Vs. the Secretary of State for India i ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-1935
Reported in: 164Ind.Cas.637
Mukerjee, J.1. The plaintiff is the proprietor of Mouzah Raninagar which appertains to Touzi No. 424 of the Murshidabad Collectorate. In 1841 Mouzah Raninagar was resumed and permanently settled with the predecessors of the plaintiff. As the result of Diara Proceedings taken in 1927-28, a quantity of land was found to have accreted to Touzi No. 424 ; and the said area was resumed and made into Diara Estate No. 3071 of the said Collectorate and assessed to revenue. The plaintiff took settlement of 47.07 acres of land. He then instituted the present suit for a declaration that the resumption and assessment of the said area were illegal and ultra vires in as much as the said area forms a part and parcel of his permanently-settled estate Touzi No. 424.2. There has 'been no irregularity in the procedure adopted by the Government in the matter of resumption and assessment in respect of the land. The plaintiff can succeed only if he can show that the area in suit forms part and parcel of Touz...
Tag this Judgment!Rajani Sutradhar and ors. Vs. Baikuntha Chandra Saha and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-1935
Reported in: 164Ind.Cas.446
R.C. Mitter, J.1. This appeal is on behalf of the defendants in a suit instituted by the plaintiffs for ejectment after service of a notice to quit. The defence was that the lands in suit had been let out to them for agricultural purposes and they, the defendants, have acquired occupancy rights and their further defence was that the notice to quit had not been served upon them. For the purpose of proving that the letting was for agricultural purposes the defendants adduced evidence that they raised in the years past crops upon a part of the lands included in the tenancy. Witness No. 5 examined on behalf of the defendants, however, admitted that the defendants had taken the lands for the purpose of residence. The letting was about 50 years before the suit : He also proved that for about 25 years crops are being raised in the southern portion of the lands in suit.2. The learned Munsif explained away the statement made by this witness that the letting was for residential purposes but the ...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Majid and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-27-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal473,157Ind.Cas.840
Lort-Williams, J.1. In this case nine persons were charged with offences under Sections 401, 328/120 B and 394/120-B, I.P.C. With regard to the charges under Section 401, they were tried with the aid of assessors, and with regard to the charges under the other sections they were tried by the Additional Sessions Judge and a jury. Biren, Majid, Chitta, Nilu and Ramani were convicted and the other four acquitted. A Rule for enhancement of sentence was issued by this Court. Biren was sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment and Nilu and Ramani to six months each. None of these have appealed. The sentences of Nilu and Ramani have already expired. Majid and Chitta were sentenced Co two years' rigorous imprisonment each, of which sentence they have already served about 12 months each.2. The case for the prosecution was that Biren was the brain of the movement alleged by the prosecution. He got to know Majid, Chitta, Pulin, Naresh and Deben and probably others, and about the end of 1931 ...
Tag this Judgment!Mohendra Nath Banerjee Vs. Rani Srimati Harshamukhi Dassi, Executrix t ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-27-1935
Reported in: 164Ind.Cas.490
D.N. Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal by defendant No. 4 and arises out of a suit brought to enforce a mortgage security. It appears that defendants Nos. 1, 2 and 3 mortgaged six properties which are described as properties Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 4 ka and 5 to certain mortgagees who are defendants Nos. 10 to 14 in the suit. They borrowed a sum of Rs. 23,000 from defendants Nos. 10 to 14 and hypothecated the properties just mentioned. This mortgage was executed on June 7, 1924. Defendants Nos. 5 to 9 are purchasers of equity of redemption like defendant No. 4 who purchased at the certificate sale lot No. 1 on June 19, 1927. The plaintiff is an assignee of the mortgagee's right in five of the properties hypothecated, the deed of assignment being dated October 4, 1929. The defence of defendant No. 4 to the suit is to be found at page 21 of the first part of the paper book. He states that the plaintiff has no cause of action against the defendants, that the suit is not maintainable in the present ...
Tag this Judgment!Apinash Chandra Sarkar and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-26-1935
Reported in: 161Ind.Cas.280
Lort-Williams, J.1. The trial of this case was vitiated by several irregularities and illegalities. In the summary form under Section 370 of 1he Code of Criminal Procedure, the offence is stated to be that of criminal breach of trust as managing agents of the Pioneer Assurance Company, Ltd., in respect of money entrusted to the accused between 1930 and 1931 by persons concerned with the said Company, by criminally misappropriating it. Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code: Further, for aiding and abetting one another in the commission of the aforesaid offence. Section 409-109 of the Indian Penal Code.2. But the charge, stated shortly, was1. That the accused managing agents of the Company between September 4, 1930, and November 15,1933, were parties to a criminal conspiracy to commit the offence of criminal breach of trust in respect of property entrusted to them or over which they had dominion in the way of their business as managing agents of the Company, representing the share-holders...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »